Excellent talk. Thank you for highlighting risks, and explaining the need for robust infrastructure with clear, vivid images. Our systems need communicators like you.
There is one story I would like to clarify. The transcript says
> there were 4,000 wind turbines that could no longer be operated.
I tried to learn more about this. What I have found differs in some key details, suggesting that the turbines did stay in operation, and that the number was 5,800 turbines, not 4,000. What was lost appears to be the ability to do remote monitoring and remote control.
You're right that the worldometer number is excessive and not to be trusted.
They properly calculated 1.147083 tons of coal per capita per year, but then incorrectly multiplied by it 1,000,000 cubic feet per ton.
The actual conversion factor for coal seems to be 20-60 cubic feet per ton, depending on whether you use bulk density or particle density. Their per capita calculation is too high by a factor of about 15,000-50,000.
You're right that the amount of coal consumed is not similar to the amount of uranium byproduct generated. The original commenter's intuition was misled, not by uranium's density, but by its energy density. Of course there is an xkcd for this.
https://xkcd.com/1162/
There is one story I would like to clarify. The transcript says
> there were 4,000 wind turbines that could no longer be operated.
I tried to learn more about this. What I have found differs in some key details, suggesting that the turbines did stay in operation, and that the number was 5,800 turbines, not 4,000. What was lost appears to be the ability to do remote monitoring and remote control.
https://cyberconflicts.cyberpeaceinstitute.org/law-and-polic...
Can you comment on these differences? It's worth resolving them, as I will definitely be sharing your transcript with other people.